1. Surveying the broad literature on cosmopolitanism is beyond the scope of this essay, so I will simply note that my definition here is indebted to Kwame Anthony Appiah's formulation, which argues for two historical strands associated with cosmopolitan ideals. “One is the idea that we have obligations to others, obligations that stretch beyond those to whom we are related by the ties of kith and kind [sic], or even the more formal ties of a shared citizenship,” Appiah claims. “The other is that we take seriously the value not just of human life but of particular human lives, which means taking an interest in the practices and beliefs that lend them significance.” Appiah goes on to argue that “cosmopolitanism shouldn't be seen as some exalted attainment: it begins with the simple idea that in the human community, as in national communities, we need to develop habits of coexistence: conversation in its older meaning, of living together, association.”Kwame Anthony Appiah,Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers(New York:W. W. Norton,2006),xv,xviii–xix. This understanding of cosmopolitanism as both a social and an ethical posture should be distinguished from accounts of cosmopolitanism that stress its formal property of familiarity with a geographically expansive world, as exemplified inKristin L. Hoganson,Consumers' Imperium: The Global Production of American Domesticity, 1865–1920(Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press,2007),14.
2. Michele Anna JordanandSusan Brady,The World Is a Kitchen: Cooking Your Way through Culture Stories, Recipes, and Resources(Palo Alto, CA:Travelers' Tales,2006),xvi.
3. SeeBob Ashleyet al.Food and Cultural Studies(London:Routledge,2004),133.